Share this

Doug Bergman (guest)
Economist , CA:

Both looked presidential and did a great job. I conclude that either would make a great President. Boring but true. Sometimes there is not only one correct answer to a question.

Stanley Hirtle (guest)
Poverty Lawyer , OH:

re: Debate All of your partisan professionals are saying how their side was totally on top. They are earning their pay I guess, but it is hard to take them seriously.

I thought Obama looked presidential, strong and vigorous. McCain may have been better at repeating themes and being on message, and sometimes showed a believeable decent side. He approached getting angry but held back. As usually happens, they get off the question to the speech they want to make. Obama seemed a little eager to show his willingness to kill people (just bin Ladin, which won't lose any votes) which is an issue for all presidential candidates and particularly Democrats. Neither of them wanted to admit that Georgia actually started the conflict with Russia by shelling their troops in South Ossetia, although Obama approached that a little bit. No one dealt with the issue of what America is going to do better in Afghanistan than Iraq, since both are highly divided, tribal societies of which we know little, and whose proud people resist invasion and occupation. Nor what victory would mean in Iraq, other than the Iraqis governing their country (or maybe countries) together without the US military being there paying people and killing people. These are probably not things voters want to hear from a candidate. They finished with well articulated defining conclusions that were unrelated to the question asked. Actually as individuals these may be the best two candidates in a while, although what matters is what kind of administration they will run and debates don't help with that. Who wins? Probably no one as these are what you make of them. Basically this is a close election.

Michael La Pier (guest)
managemet , CA:

Looks to me like I must have been watching an entirely different debate than some of your commenter's saw. I saw John McCain come across as an old guy that has a failing grasp on the past and no vision for the future. He seemed angry, dismissive and arrogant; sound familiar from the last 7 plus years? This from a guy that I voted for in 2000!

I fail to understand how anyone could say he won the debate, much less a slam dunk as our esteemed professor from Northwestern would have you believe. Poise, command of the issues, respectful deference to the experience (age) of Mr. McCain........that is what you saw in Sen. Obama. Looked like a President to anyone that cared to view the debate without preconceived notions. I can't believe I actually heard a commentator on one of the mainstream TV channels say that Obama referring to McCain by his first name was somehow disrespectful. If he would have referred to him as Senator or my good friend they would have said he was talking too much like a senator or a professor. The media coverage seems to be more geared to make sure you watch the next debate and to keeping the election alive for purposes of making more advertising $$$ rather than covering the debate truthfully and factually. The early polls all say that Obama won.

Patricia Valese (guest)
teacher , NJ:

I realize many of us want Obama to 'attack' his opponent. It just ain't his style, ironically enough, it's one of the things you learn to admire him for.

What I can't get over it how lucid and commanding he is on ALL the issues. What John McCain is entirely engaged in, is so obvious, (it scares the hell out of me) - is war, war, weapons, warriors, crusades, enemies, tactics, and "STRATEGIES'. To me this debate revealed both candidates exactly for who they are. Want to war with another country in the next four years? Vote John McCain.

Roque Nuevo (guest)
Internet :

Most disappointing aspect of the debate: No one even tried to answer the question about their national security philosophy. This was involved in the "lessons learned" question about Iraq but I think there was another question about this specifically: something like "when do you think it's correct to use military force?" Protect interests? Spread democracy? Respond to threat? Are preventive actions correct? and so forth. I heard nothing about any of this.

Rhonda Wilkerson (guest)
RN , OR:

Obama appeared young,composed and inteligent. McCain appeared old,angry and nostalgic. I didn't learn anything new from the canidates tonight and that was a disappointment.

J.P. Hogan (guest)
writer/commentator , CT:

I won't say McCain swept the Senate Floor with his collegue but then they were not on the Senate Floor. "In conclusion, my dad was from Kenya and wrote a letter to America..." so please vote for me. To answer economic crisis Obama directly implied he would have to avoid most of his programs and lead like McCain was suggesting for the first year or until economy got better. Oh, and if the terrorist call Iraq the central front why is such not good intelligence Senator Obama?

Brian Culhane (guest)
Sales :

Toss Up!

Lillian Neiblum (guest)
Retired , PA:

John McCain has shown us he is an angry, grouchy old man. He is certainly collecting Social Security benefits and is covered by Medicare and, with his wife's largesse, will be able to live out his life quite confortably. He should just go home, put his feet up, and let the younger generation create the kind of America we want. Obama is our future....let him guide this country back to the esteem we once had.

Toby Scammell (guest)
consultant , CA:

On how the financial bailout will change their policies going forward:
Neither candidate seems to grasp that being president is about the allocation of resources--their time and our money. Given fierce competition for both (and increasingly scarce financial resources) what are their actual priorities? Does McCain think his tax cuts are more important than his energy plan? Does Obama think his health care proposal is more important than ethics reform?
Someone should ask: Given $100 or 100 hours of time, how would each candidate allocate their resources? And then, what would they do if they suddenly had half the resources?
Both candidates lack a unifying strategy--the common thread that ties together their priorities and links them to an overarching vision. Change, whether Republican or Democratic, is not a strategy.

Ben Berry (guest)
Business Analyst , OH:

I think the difference between the two debaters was fairly clear: Obama was talking fact, policy planning, and goals for the future. McCain was talking about his past and digging for the soundbyte.
I think one of the commentators said it best: Obama seems like a president, and McCain like and ex-president. McCains speaks of Obamas short record, but also seems to have to spend most of his own time backing away from his own record on regulation and the realities of the war of in Iraq and its effect on the war on terror.

Darci Dawn (guest)
Radio Personality , CA:

Ol' whistler is really on the defense tonight. Obama Looked Presidential. Why wasn't MaCain giving us anything we can sink our teeth into. No real plan. Being a POW doesn't qualify you to be a president. Good thing he showed up.

Jack Opel (guest)
College Instructor , WI:

"Tim Griffin, Republican attorney and strategist:" is making the same mistake of other "republican strategists": Thinking that Americans don't know vague, abstract, indifferent responses when they see them.

Alana Strother (guest)
Paralegal , GA:

I think that Obama is doing a great job by showing that he does not fuel his decisions based on false fear and emotions. McCain is playing on emotions of fear and emotion rather than the real issues. He wants to continue to war instead of saving the American people 10B per month.

Mill Montejo (guest)
Fleet Supervisor , NJ:

McCain seems to be faring pretty well in my opinion. I'm surprised.

james drayton (guest)
IT , GA:

Is it just me or is McCain consistently getting caught in his lies ---- watch his jawline --- he is about ready to explode -- McCain seems terribly unprepared for this debate --- he cannot offer any stats or strategies of what he would do as Commander in Chief ..

Bill Hayes (guest)
Musician , NY:

Regarding Russia:
Making Georgia a member of NATO would, at this juncture, be a strategic mistake. We can't afford to engage Russsia in a war, which would be a requirement in the current Georgian situation if Georgia were a NATO member. Also, our common interests with Russia are profound. We will depend on them for delivery to the Space Station when the Space Shuttle is fazed out, and the issue of loose nukes cited by Sen. Obama is among the must important (and undervalued) issues of our time. But both candidates need to be careful about bringing Georgia into NATO. This would antagonize Russia, and any military response be Russia would upset an important but tenuous relationship.

Robert Jacobson (guest)
Management Consultant , AZ:

We are looking in on two Senators having a sparring match as they might on the floor of the Senate -- where most often, there is no audience.
The American people are waiting for the future President to appear.
And waiting....
And waiting....

Robert Jacobson (guest)
Management Consultant , AZ:

We are looking in on two Senators having a sparring match as they might on the floor of the Senate -- where most often, there is no audience. The American people are waiting for the future President to appear. And waiting.... And waiting....

Mike Walters (guest)
Political Scientist , NC:

WASHINGTON, Sept. 16 (UPI) -- Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger says the United States should begin direct negotiations with Iran over its nuclear enrichment program.
Kissinger, speaking Monday at George Washington University along with four other former U.S. State Department secretaries, said the next president should initiate high-level discussions with Iran "without conditions," ABC News reported.

Julie Kritch (guest)
Student, Young Person , MI:

Obama beginning statements with "Senator McCain is right" is not some sort of concession of defeat. He's simply stating that McCain has stated a basic principle on which they both agree. Then Obama expands on that basic principle in a meaningful way. Don't fault the man for knowing how to conduct himself in a debate.

Julie Kritch (guest)
Student, Young Person , MI:

It's important to remember that the average American - perhaps the average hockey mom - doesn't fully understand current and future foreign policy. However, even as eyes glaze across the nation, body language is hard to miss. McCain won't even orient himself towards Obama, let alone address him directly.

John Luongo (guest)
Venture Capitalist , CA:

I didn't realize that McCain was such a rambler. Lots of words. Little substance.

Gus Woody (guest)
milkman , AK:

Spending is the largest difference between these fellows. Although I like McCain's direction. Since spending is the largest issue in this country.

Maurice Bissonnette (guest)
Engineer , MI:

It is clear to me that McCAin is living in a dream world of Iraq being responsible for Bin Laden. Sorry wrong war, wrong person ...

Timothy Bladel (guest)
Small Buisness owner , IA:

Did Obama say for the third time Obama said McCain is right. This isn't going to work. McCain is schooling Obama right now!

Matt Moran (guest)
Business owner :

It would be nice for Mc Cain to start making some sense. He's all over the place...

mike berger (guest)
training manager , TX:

When Obama points out that McCain is against a package that includes items he is in favor of, such as off-shore oil drilling because of the tax implications to the rich, McCain's smile is an admission of agreement. "Yeah, yeah, you got me..."

More POLITICO Arena

About the Arena

The Arena is a cross-party, cross-discipline forum for intelligent and lively conversation about political and policy issues. Contributors have been selected by POLITICO staff and editors. David Mark, Arena's moderator, is a Senior Editor at POLITICO. Each morning, POLITICO sends a question based on that day's news to all contributors.